Reviewed “all of the communications that were to or from” Hillary Clinton.

When FBI Director James Comey alerted Congress that new emails required a re-opening of the Hillary investigation, I noted Ed Morrissey’s observation that this could be another Lucy-Charlie Brown football situation, with Republicans and other opponents of Hillary having the ball pulled away at the last minute.

I also polled readers, who by 2-1 said the FBI would not exonerate Hillary before the election.

There were signs of pressure from above, with DOJ promising to throw all resources to resolve the issue. Loretta Lynch, who didn’t want Comey to make the disclosure in the first place, was not going to let this linger until election day. The Clinton campaign and mainstream media had declared war on Comey.

And, SURPRISE, Comey just issued a letter saying no change in FBI decision not to recommend prosecution of Hillary:

These people obviously have a very low opinion of the average American’s ability to think critically. They are supposed to be the employees of the American people. We all know by now that something horrible happened to our constitutional republic while we were distracted by reality tv and other delights.

My work experience has taught me that if I ever treated one of my bosses like an idiot- as these government clowns are treating us- I would be given a short time to explain myself. I had better come up with a good explanation of my behaviors and/or beliefs about my boss and my job. Otherwise, I would be shown the door, after turning in any equipment and keys. This happened once in college (my professor WAS an idiot) and at least once in my working career. The professor failed me in the music appreciation class. The facility administrator fired me for insubordination. One lesson I learned in all of this is that, If I think my boss is an idiot, I need to find another job.

All of the minions of the government, by definition are our employees. We pay them their salary. A good number of them are acting as if we as a people do not have enough common sense to realize that they are stealing from us. Since they have had no consequences to their actions, they have learned that either we are ok with getting such shoddy work performance, or we are too stupid to realize it.

Every day, more Americans wake up to this sad reality. The question is: How many of us need to awaken before we legally, constitutionally replace our employees with people who actually will do the job. I hope we hit critical mass very soon, while there is a USA to salvage.

It only makes perfect sense to in-the-tank Clinonistas who have just as much disregard for honesty, integrity, and national security/ignoramuses who don’t know what they are talking about. The kind of people who can be fooled by the lie, or are willing to go along with the lie, that there is such a thing as “unclassified then” but “upgraded to classified” or “deemed classified now.”

The evidence is right in front of your face on the latest email that shows Hillary Clinton shared information classified at the time with Chelsea. In response to FOIA request, the DoS said the content to of this email was exempt from release because it’s Confidential. And the reason? 1.4(B); that’s the paragraph in the December 2009 E.O. “Classified National Security Information” that designates Foreign Government Information a category of classified information. And what’s different about FGI is that the foreign government that provides it determines the classification level. The recipient, and it’s not always the State Department which is how I know this as I didn’t work for the State Department but I was involved in government-to-government intelligence sharing relationships, must abide by the provider’s requirements.

So that information that the State Department is lying about not being “classified at the time, but deemed classified now” was indisputably classified at the time. Beyond a shadow of a doubt. Because it’s not the State Department’s call as to whether or not now. They didn’t originate it. In this case a foreign government originated it. The originating authority always determines the classification level. Ergo it was classified by the foreign government when they provided it to the State Department.

It works the same way whenever the State Department isn’t the originating department or agency, by the way. The originating agency such as CIA or NSA or ONI determines the classification level and just like with FGI the DoS can not simply ignore it. Which is what Hillary Clinton did but tries and fails to excuse by claiming there’s a problem with overclassification. Any user of classified information can challenge the originator’s determination. There’s a procedure in place for that. Simply ignoring both the procedure and the originator’s determination and handling it how you damn well please is not how it’s done. The fact that she claims she treated classified information as unclassified because she personally thought it was overclassified compounds her guilt. It doesn’t excuse it.

The State Department is not only demonstrating contempt for the truth, for the intelligence of the American people (except for yours, ORDA, they have you accurately calibrated), and national security. They are compounding Hillary Clinton’s obvious crimes by demonstrating contempt for foreign governments that provide us with information they deem classified when they provide it.

I know for a fact that had a foreign government official showed such gross disregard for our classified information, we cut them off. We would not share anymore classified information with them until the agency or ministry could demonstrate they had revised their procedures and safeguards to ensure that such a breach would never take place again. And in order to demonstrate this commitment to safeguarding classified information that we provided them we also would push for the offending official to be prosecuted whenever possible. It’s not always possible as some countries do not have anything remotely like our Espionage Act. Then we would settle for administrative action. I’ve actually been involved in ruining foreign officials’ careers. I didn’t want to do it as these were people with which I had very friendly relationships. They were more than my counterparts in the exchange. We were real friends who did things together outside of work; we been to each others homes, we knew each other’s families. But I was only in those countries to do the government’s job, so this unpleasant business was also one of my duties.

But if the entire agency or ministry took the attitude of the DoS, that they didn’t think the information was classified “then;” that is when we provided the information that we had determined to be classified, that would have ended the relationship entirely.

You rabid Clinton partisans seem to think this is just about “getting” Hillary Clinton. It’s not. I can absolutely guarantee that her flagrant disregard for safeguarding FGI (as well as her entire department’s) has damaged these relationships. The DNI has abrogated his responsibility as well; he’s required by law to do a damage assessment when someone negligently or arrogantly because she’s above the law releases classified information out into the wild. Because he’s a rabid partisan like you, ORDA, and he knows it would devastate Hillary Clinton’s chances to become President. But any foreign government who provides any classified information to any department or agency is doing their own damage assessment.

There assessment had to be what the DNI’s would have been had he not abdicated responsibility. Any information they provided the USG is now known by the whole world. And now they have to factor in the idea that the original criminal, Hillary Clinton, who if you take her at her word values her own “convenience” over abiding by US laws, regulations, executive orders, and more importantly to them bilateral or multilateral agreements the US has with other countries, may get a promotion and become President. They also have to factor in the DNI refuses his job. And have to factor in the fact the FBI director refuses to do his job. He’s refusing in two ways; he won’t enforce the law as written, and he too has utter disregard for national security. And they will have to conclude any classified information they provide in the future will be compromised. They will act accordingly. We have great intelligence gathering capabilities but we’re not the only game in town.

I have read the FBI report. It’s not a report of an investigation. It’s obvious from the start that this was going to be a whitewash. On page 2 of 47 they start making that perfectly clear. They note their “inability” to gain access to all the devices and computer equipment they would have needed in order to determine if hostile foreign entities had hacked into her rogue server. Well of course they didn’t have what they needed. They didn’t search Clinton’s houses. They didn’t search anybody’s house. They never tried to get a search warrant to do what any competent investigating agency would have done; go to a judge and get a search warrant.

That’s what the NYPD did when investigating Huma Abedin’s husband for sexting with a minor. They got a search warrant and seized his devices and computers. Then when they found those 650k federal records they told the FBI about what they found. Had the FBI been conducting an actual investigation the FBI would have seized it months to a year ago. They would have gotten a warrant and searched not only Clinton’s but all her aides’ homes and they would seized all their devices, computers, etc.

That’s what a competent law enforcement agency conducting an actual investigation into a potential crime does. The NYPD did, and the FBI didn’t.

In stark contrast to a professional investigation the FBI just asked nicely and the DoJ gave immunity deals to individuals who refused to provide physical evidence that the FBI was entitled to. Had this been an actual investigation there would have been a grand jury; grand juries have the power to issue subpoenas for such evidence. Or they could have gone to a judge who would have issued a warrant because their own report shows they had more than enough evidence to support it.

Yes, in light of this report Comey’s decision not to recommend an indictment against Hillary Clinton makes a certain sense. Because it isn’t report on an investigation because from the start it’s clear there was never an investigation. The report acknowledges the FBI didn’t have much of the physical evidence it would have needed to have to determine if Clinton’s server compromised national security. And they didn’t have it because Comey and Lynch wouldn’t let them get it (just like when Clinton claimed she couldn’t recall key facts because of her concussion the investigating agents tried to verify this by getting her medical records but their bosses in the FBI and DoJ refused to let them get it). They didn’t have key physical or documentary evidence because the FBI/DoJ refused to look for it; this was intended from the start to be a whitewash. The report is really an indictment of the FBI under Comey’s malfeasance in office. So, yeah, given all that it makes perfect sense would compound his malfeasance by recommending what he did. There’s a certain symmetry between a report on an indefensible whitewash posing as an investigation and Comey’s indefensible incoherent gibberish about how Clinton shouldn’t be indicted.

Even though the report is of a farce of investigation, there are still enough available facts to know that he should have recommended an indictment. Sufficient facts are there, and in Comey’s testimony; under oath he told Congress that even if hostile foreign powers had gained access to Hillary Clinton’s server it’s highly unlikely there’d be any evidence of it. Professional intelligence services that conduct cyber-espionage simply do not leave traces of their intrusion.

One indisputable fact that makes this a slam dunk case is that Hillary Clinton signed a binding legal contract with the USG, at least one non-disclosure agreement that what we know of and there would have been more, in which she stipulates that she briefed and trained on the safe handling of and storage of classified material including Sensitive Compartmented Information (what the media is referring to as SAP), the legal penalties for failing to do so, that she understood classified information is classified whether it’s marked or not (it has to because that’s exactly what Obama’s E.O. regarding classified national security information says, and indeed every President’s E.O. on the subject going back to the mid-nineties says). Such a binding agreement is a prerequisite to gaining access.

That NDA trumps every one of her denials about not recalling, about never having been trained, having never been briefed, about how it wasn’t marked classified, etc. If somebody tried that obvious B.S. in a court of law, as such denials are the oldest trick in the book and the first refuge of liars who know they’ve been caught dead to rights, the judge in a military or civil case will instruct the jury, “Disregard those statements. The defendant is a trained professional in handling and safeguarding classified material and (in Hillary Clinton’s case) is an original classification authority responsible for recognizing classified information when it is not marked as such, and determining if it should be classified and how it should be marked.”

The last is important is it requires holding Hillary Clinton to a higher standard. Another of Obama’s E.O. designates her by job title as an original classification authority (OCA). She might try the defense that she never had the training for that. But dereliction of duty is never a mitigating factor but always an aggravating factor. It demonstrates gross negligence; she designated by job title to have special responsibilities r.e. safeguarding classified information and she refused to learn how to fulfill those responsibilities. If this ever saw the inside of a court room Clinton have no defense whatsoever.

And neither does Comey. The FBI is the lead counter intelligence law enforcement agency in the country. So one of Comey’s main responsibilities is safeguarding national security. But you will never see any expression of concern for national security in this report and it wasn’t in his testimony.

Instead he had to rewrite the statute and pretend the gross negligence standard of proving a culpable mind or mens rea is somehow unconstitutional or un-American. It’s not, on both counts; in fact the Supreme Court has ruled establishing mens rea in all be a very few types of crime is not even constitutionally required at all. This is certainly not one of those few cases. Access to TS/SCI or really any level of classified material is not a right. Anyone who has access has a special duty of care. The gross negligence standard is in 18 U.S.C. 793(f) for a reason. And federal courts have recognized Congress’ intent on multiple occasions (not just the one the liar Comey claims there is). The language is there to remind people who have access, and to scare them a little bit, that their are criminal penalties for failing to exercise that special duty of care. There is a hierarchy of consequences depending on one’s degree of culpability. Gross negligence is the lowest degree of culpability, but it is a perfectly legal, American, and Constitutional standard. If it wasn’t than at least some of those convictions for violating 18 U.S.C. 793(f) would have been found unconstitutional by the SCOTUS.

Comey’s recommendation is indefensible. But it only makes a certain sense when you read that report and realize that everything Comey did from the start to prevent his agents from gaining access to evidence they required and they were entitled to have, to prevent them from following leads that would have obviously led to other crimes such as obstruction and violating the federal records act, conspiracy to violate the Espionage Act, etc., etc. is also indefensible.

So, ORDA, have you been fooled by these lies or are knowingly advancing these lies?

Interesting, but I guess you will have to put me down as an in-the-tank Clinonista. For 1 thing, WikiLeaks never produced a hacked e-mail from Clinton’s server. So I have to assume that they never hacked her server. For another, I don’t buy that an email can become classified unless someone stripped the classification off. I haven’t heard it claimed that anyone removed a classification.

For another, tRump is a bigger security risk than Clinton will ever be. He knows nothing and doesn’t want to learn. His foreign policy statements have been incoherent or simplistic. He has managed to alienate Latinos and Muslims – who represent 1/3 of the world. On top of that, he has introduced doubt into our strongest alliance, NATO. The only leader he likes is Putin.

So frankly, I don’t care about the emails anymore. Obama can pardon Hillary and Humma on his way out the door. There is precedent for that since Ford pardoned Nixon. It is not exact, but it is close enough for government work. She will not be impeached and convicted.

The last time Trump took on something he didn’t know anything about, he bankrupted 3 casinos. His original partners got as far away from him as fast as they could because it was obvious he didn’t know what he was doing and didn’t want to listen or learn. He also screwed those partners and broke his promises to Atlantic City and the NJ Gaming Commission. I don’t want that happening with our foreign policy or military. He is absolutely unqualified. The debates proved he can’t pay attention and doesn’t know anything.

“Interesting, but I guess you will have to put me down as an in-the-tank Clinonista. For 1 thing, WikiLeaks never produced a hacked e-mail from Clinton’s server. So I have to assume that they never hacked her server.”

I would be embarrassed to say something so inane in public. If Wikileaks hasn’t released any emails hacked that means they never hacked her server. First of all Wikileaks never does their own hacking. They publish information they get from hackers. No doubt in this case, the Russians. And just because the Russians or any other professional intelligence hasn’t provided Wikileaks with hacked (although hacked is probably the wrong word since security was so bad they could have waltzed right in as an authorized user) doesn’t mean they don’t have them.

Seriously, you’re going by what you’ve seen on Wikileaks as your guide? What’s next; how can we believe something happened if we didn’t see it on TV?

“For another, I don’t buy that an email can become classified unless someone stripped the classification off. I haven’t heard it claimed that anyone removed a classification.”

Speaking of indefensible incoherent gibberish, I see it isn’t Comey who is reduced to it. I said classified information remains classified whether it’s marked or not. I would never say something so nonsensical as it “can become classified unless someone stripped the classification off” (WTFO?!?!). That sentence makes no sense in English or in this universe, but there may be an opening for you in the FBI in Comey’s universe. And if you haven’t heard anyone say that someone was stripping the classification markings off clearly classified information then just like Comey shutting his eyes so he could say “I don’t see any intent here” you’ve been shoving your fingers in your ears and shouting “Neener, neener, I CAN’T HEAR YOU” so you wouldn’t hear it. In particular John Schindler who used to work at NSA and recognized information that was clearly written by No Such Agency (as it used to be known, and still should be). Word for word, but with the classification markings removed. And he isn’t the only one.

But let’s cut to the chase. I no you don’t care about integrity. I know you don’t care about the truth. I know you don’t care about national security. So of course you don’t care about the emails. But here’s the thing. The NYPD has copies of everything from Weiner’s personal computer. And they care about the emails. And from what I hear there is solid evidence of multiple New York state felonies committed by the Clintons and their cronies, in particular related to their foundation.

Personally I hope Obama does pardon Clinton. And moreover I hope she accepts it. Because it’s settled law since Burdick v. United States that a pardon carries “an imputation of guilt” and accepting a pardon constitutes “a confession of guilt.”

That was actually very important to Ford when he pardoned Nixon. Ford had what he always remembered as a very difficult conversation with Nixon. Nixon kept trying to steer the conversation away from Burdick, but in the end he was forced to agree that by accepting the pardon he was admitting his guilt.

[When Ford was interviewed in his 80’s, he was asked]: Why didn’t you make sure that Nixon’s statement accepting the pardon went further? Nixon’s statement said, “No words can describe the depth of my regret and pain at the anguish my mistakes over Watergate had caused.”

Why didn’t he press Nixon harder for an admission of guilt? “I still carry it around in my packet, their statement,” Ford said. He reached into his pockets. “I’ve got it in my wallet here because any time anybody challenges me I pull it out.” He searched around in his wallet.

He handed me a folded, dog-eared piece of paper. It was a portion of the 1915 Burdick Supreme Court decision that he’d been carrying around for years. I began to read aloud. “Most important, the justices found that a pardon ‘carries an imputation of guilt, acceptance, a confession of it,'”

Ford landed on the last phrase, & he repeated it: “‘Acceptance, a confession of it.'” See, Nixon confessed, he said. “That was always very reassuring to me.”
Source: Profiles in Courage by Caroline Kennedy, p.308-309 Oct 1, 2001 ”

Anyone who accepts a pardon before being tried and convicted in court is admitting they need it. This is why people have refused pardons and instead demanded their day in court. Because they didn’t need it; unlike people who accept pardons as their only way out, people who have refused pardons have been convinced of their own innocence.

What’s even more beautiful? A President can only pardon people for committing federal crimes. A President has no constitutional power to pardon people for committing crimes at the state level. And even more beautiful than that? Anyone who accepts a pardon loses their fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination for all acts covered by the pardon.

I’m actually pleased that Comey’s FBI conducted a farce of an investigation. I’m pleased that they didn’t even bother to make it appear as if they were even interested in keeping up appearances by doing what all professional law enforcement agencies do; get search warrants, search people’s houses and seize evidence. Because then Anthony Weiner’s laptop (I feel dirty just for saying those three words together like that) would have gone into the same black hole that everything else the FBI and DoJ had on Clinton has gone into, never to be seen again. If the FBI and DoJ had even bothered to mimic a professional investigation that laptop wouldn’t have been available for the NYPD to seize.

And then the Clinton’s problems would be over. But now they’re not. One might argue that there is a sort of temporary immunity for Hillary Clinton as long as she’s President, but that didn’t work well for Billy Jeff the first time around. And it work for him now because “first gigolo” isn’t an official office. He can’t resort to it, nor Chelsea, nor can Huma Abedin or any other of Hillary’s aides.

So enjoy the calm in the eye of the storm, in-the-tank Clintonistas. It’s just an illusion if you you think Comey’s latest letter to Congress means the storm is over.

@Arminius Interesting that you ignored my main point. I don’t want DJT near our Foreign Policy, Classified Documents or Military. That is more important than the emails. He is pathologically ignorant and his temperament is unsuitable.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, it is extremely rare for anyone to be prosecuted for violations of classification that do not involve disclosure to unauthorized parties.

I don’t understand you dismissal of my point on WikiLeaks. They have clearly been a conduit for the Russians. If the Russians had hacked Clinton Server emails, their release would have sunk her no matter what the FBI said. It would have been infinitely more damaging that the Podesta stuff. I can think of scenarios where they wanted Clinton to win, but they wanted leverage. So they are holding them back. But the scenarios get more and more far fetched. I will leave those theories for some of the nuttier people on sites like this. I do no include you, since your arguments are cogent and factual.

Cuomo can pardon her for state crimes. Cuomo & Obama can do it in the name of ‘healing the country’ and avoiding years of deadlock. They can do what was done for Nixon and pardon her for any and all crimes that she may or may not have committed. Clinton has already said she was wrong and is sorry. So it will be no problem for her to admit that she violated ‘technical regulations’. She can cite the FBI report.

As for your personal attacks on my integrity, I couldn’t care less. I have observed the personalities and behavior of both candidates for most of my adult life. I am a New Yorker and probably was rolling my eyes about him long before you heard of him. tRump has absolutely NO redeeming qualities. Clinton does. You couldn’t even trust tRump on the issues you care about.

A grifter is always a grifter. They do not change. They have to con everyone. They get their satisfaction from the con. For tRump, winning the Presidency without preparation or qualification would be the ultimate con. You really don’t see it? He has been on both side of every issue. He gave money to the Clintons and they attended his last wedding. He supported PP. Do you think he has found god? Come on! Give me a break.

I have personal experience from having spent time with a grifter. I thought I was on the inside. But no one is on the inside. Not his wife; not his ‘friends’ – no one. I wthought that I escaped unscathed. It was only years later that I realized he got me. He did not steal my money, but he did damage my reputation by using my name to con someone else. That other person blamed me until we cross paths and I was lucky enough to be able to clear the air. I was indirectly ‘got’. tRump is unacceptable.

“@Arminius Interesting that you ignored my main point. I don’t want DJT near our Foreign Policy, Classified Documents or Military. That is more important than the emails. He is pathologically ignorant and his temperament is unsuitable.”

No, I didn’t ignore it. I was pointing out that Clinton she’s already demonstrated she is far worse than you imagine Trump would be. And I don’t like Trump.

It’s more important the the emails? Why are you being deliberately obtuse? The emails constitute a tsunami of evidence that she should never, ever again have access to classified information. This is a matter of historical fact. It’s not conjecture.

Let’s combine a discussion of temperament and who should be in the military. Hillary Clinton treats people in the military like shit. Man or woman, Democrat, Republican, independent it didn’t matter. She was making one her photo op swings through the sand box either as Senator or SecState. And she united all genders and people of different in political stripes in agreement on one fact. Whatever plane or helo she was flying in was unofficially called “Broomstick 1.” Because she is an evil, nasty witch.

A K-9 handler and his dog were clearing her quarters for explosives. She came in and cussed him and his dog out. She ended her profanity laced tirade by demanding he get that “goddam thing outta here.” That’s how she treats people who are trying to keep her safe. A Secret Service agent went up to the guy as he was leaving and said something along the lines of “Don’t let it get to you. That’s how she treats everybody.”

Everybody who isn’t in a position to enrich the grifter.

One of my favorite blogs is The DiploMad 2.O, by retired FSO W. Lewis Amselem with I believe 30 years or so of service. Here he recounts his experience with Hillary Clinton back when she was still First Lady.

“‘No Ugly or Fat People on the Rope Line!’ Remembering a Visit by Hillary Clinton

Her staff proved unbelievably arrogant and ignorant. They had zero interest in Panama, and only went along to see some sites because they had to do so. We had been told FLOTUS wanted activities after the ‘summit’ that would strengthen US-Panama relations. The staff had no interest in the long US-Panamanian relationship, had no interest in the Canal, or in the very well run Panama Canal Museum. In the end, they decided that FLOTUS should do ‘something with Indians, you know, Indians.’ They decided that she should have a photo-op at an Indian village reading to the kids and telling them about the importance of an education. The whole silly thing nearly came off the rails when the staff insisted that FLOTUS have secure telephone communication everywhere she went, including in the Indian village. I remember asking one staffer, ‘Why does she need secure commo? Is she going to be calling in the B-52s?’ That did not endear me to the staffers, but in the end they had to give up the demand because of cost.

…Hillary decided to have a ‘rope line’ at the airport so that as she was leaving she could shake hands with some of the people from the Embassy who had made her visit possible. A female staffer approached me the day before, and sheepishly began talking about the ‘sort of people’ Hillary wanted in her pictures. She said that the pictures should have a ‘certain look.’ She kept beating about the bush re the rope line, and suddenly a light went on in my dim brain, ‘She doesn’t want fat or ugly people in her pictures, right?’ The staffer nodded. I said, ‘OK, I’ll be sure to pass that on.’

Of course, I didn’t, but I did make sure one old ugly guy was not at the departure ceremony, me.”

Trump is pathologically ignorant? Hillary Clinton knows nothing and is interested in knowing nothing outside of who can grease her palm. Mr. Amselem’s description of her staff? That’s a reflection of Hillary Clinton. She chose her “unbelievably arrogant and ignorant” staff. Birds of a feather, ORDA, flock together. You may have heard that somewhere.

She has no accomplishments to her credit. To the contrary she has a record of disaster. As SecState she traveled the world kicking over tables and belching gasoline on all the fires she set. And some she didn’t. She started a lot of the fires but she didn’t necessarily start all the fires. But she always made them worse. Every thing she touched as SecState she made worse. Because she is pathologically ignorant. She is a rigid ideologue, seeing the world through her ideological prism, incapable of seeing the world as it is. Incapable of learning. That’s what happens when you combine unbelievable arrogance with unbelievable ignorance.

The bottom line is that everything you’re afraid Donald Trump might do, Hillary Clinton has already done by the ship load.

When it comes to legal matters, you usually stick to the law. Did you actually read the FBI report or even a non-partisan summary?

Clinton does not come out looking good. But her errors were not criminal.

I know you are not a supporter, but it needs to be said that the same could be said of tRump. Over his lifetime he constantly skirted the law, lied, exaggerated and used every underhanded, sneaky, quasi-legal trick he or his advisors could think up to screw creditors, investors, partners, contractors, workers, consumers, taxing authorities and the general public. During this campaign he has exhibited bigotry and hatred. He has shown a complete lack of understanding for our system of laws and the Constitution. The man is a Black Hole of narcissism.

If the system was rigged, tRump would have never got his name on a single ballot. Just writing this makes me want to take a shower.

Violations of the criminal statutes concerning classified material don’t require “intent.” Hillary Clinton is an attorney, was a senator, has been involved in government her entire adult life, and was SoS – she cannot claim ignorance. Although she arguably had no intent to violate the laws concerning how she received, sent, and stored classified information, she had a responsibility to abide by the law above and beyond that of a common citizen, being in a position of public trust. She violated that trust dozens of times, and now makes lame excuses for her conduct, and you somehow continue to believe that there was nothing “criminal” about her conduct in spite of the plain language of the law that criminalizes conduct the Hillary herself acknowledges.
Even given the “lack of intent” and the “not marked classified” excuses, it is also a criminal offense to attempt to evade disclosure laws and to destroy government records, both of which crimes Hillary is plainly guilty of in spades.
Also guilty is every person who knew about and failed to report the illegal transmission, reception, and storage (all unsecured) of classified material. This includes Hillary and everyone who knew of her private server and who sent/received classified material to/from her.
Nothing excuses any of these violations. There are simply no arguments that these laws weren’t violated (most of what has been alleged has been acknowledged by Hillary herself or James Comey when he testified before Congress – to say nothing of WikiLeaks) or that the people who violated them didn’t commit crimes. You’re deluding yourself if you believe otherwise. (I didn’t write “think otherwise” because “thinking” has nothing to do with your apparently delusional state.)

We can all hope and pray that these guardians of the public good (sarcasm is very intentional) have our best interests in mind. Call me a glass is half empty kind of guy but…. Really? This will turn out to be the largest case of CYA in American, maybe world history. Provided these losers do not rewrite history, that is.

I would like to know, sir…….what are our other options right now? Given how down you are on Trump and his supporters, what is our alternative? Stay home? Vote for Gary Johnson? Any option other than voting for Trump equates to Hillary. Give us your answer, oh so enlightened one!

That has the presumption that they were really looking. Of that I am not convinced. Like I said Comey is a smart guy, what would you really look for? Most likely something you just can not ignore and praying the whole time that it isn’t there.

A critical difference here is that they found the emails on Spanky’s laptop, meaning they got the data in electronic format. They were therefore able to analyze the emails with computer programs with things like semantic analytics, network analysis, etc.

With Hillary’s emails, part of the way she obstructed the investigations was to “hand over” her emails in printed form. Automated analysis was therefore impossible.

It’s two very different things. In the first case you have a structured database. In the second you have unstructured text, probably rife with errors. And you wouldn’t be able to validate the content of any of the messages because the checksums/dkim keys aren’t on printed output, and even if they were they would never match with scanned output. Night and day really.

You are missing the point. Comparing the two candidates and saying that one is the lesser of two evils is what I have seen all my adult life. “Our system is not perfect, but it is the best there is,” was a common statement made around me in my formative years. The US is not the best there is. They are just the best at hiding the corruption within their government. And they are not very good at hiding it at that. Most of the world has our number. Only a portion of the American population has not figured it out yet. When will we wake up?

Legal voters must obtain the permission from the IRS if they are to participate in the elections. The IRS, on purely political grounds, refuses to give permission to organize to legal voters

Meanwhile, tens of millions of illegal voters have been imported into the country by our political class. They are given, food, clothing, medical care, housing and are strongly encouraged to vote in our elections.

Half of the people in the US draw benefits from the government while fewer than other half pay for the benefits.

You are delusional. In 30 states the voting apparatus is controlled by republicans. Couldn’t they scare up a few hundred of the ‘millions’ you claim are voting illegally? Last I heard the few documented cases of fraud in this election cycle have been perpetrated by republicans!

This is a democratic issue with far too many overlapping and convergent interests. Only the People and our unplanned Posterity can make the choice. Obama’s heir apparent may represent the progressive corruption, but it is Americans who are on trial.

The Huma/Wiener emails have accomplished the purpose that was envisioned for them, when Comey released the information a little over one week ago. CYA for the establishment media.

My opinion is that the info was originally released solely to give the corporate media, especially its polling arm, cover following a Hillary defeat. Trump has always been enjoying much higher levels of support than the polls showed, during this contest. It also allows the media to deny Trump a mandate, should he come in with vastly higher voter numbers than Hillary. The prevalence of vote fraud has been reduced, significantly, through the prophylactic actions of the Trump campaign. Without significant vote fraud, Hillary does not have the voter support to overcome the Trump advantage. Now, it will be possible to blame a Hillary loss on Comey, rather than on Hillary’s deficiencies.

This has become all about CYA, for the establishment. Remember, virtually the entire US Congress is, and will remain, Establishment controlled politicians. Trump can slow or even postpone the Establishment agenda, but he can not stop it alone. A lot will depend upon what the Congress looks like after the 2018 elections.

BUT, if any part true…and with the caveat that I am no techie…it seems a fairly easy chore to write a thingie that would sort through to find duplicates, and another thingie that would identify personal stuff.

From the Linux command line, it is very easy to find unique emails from a batch of email. Particularly if the the emails are in exchange format which use unique files for each email.

In my own case, I wrote a script and downloaded in bulk and secured a batch of my emails from Yahoo.com for my attorney using the command line. I even extracted mime extensions and put them in a separate folder.

This is quite probably what Wikileaks does too.

[I have an ongoing dispute with a bank that required me to get him all our email correspondence.]

The risk of becoming the next Gaddafi (or Stevens) is a clear and present danger. There is even a greater risk of being chosen as a financial, social, and legal target of the traditional Democratic baby hunt.

You do understand that they are stored on a computer? Maybe you are so computer illiterate that you don’t understand that the FBI can use searches and forensic tools? They don’t have to actually read every email. They can also use tools to compare the emails found on the new devices with the old emails and winnow the pile down to any that don’t match.

I think you missed the point. The State Department has been dragging out the release of emails for months, yet the FBI can go through 650,000 and reliably say “nothing new/criminal here” in a matter of two or three weeks? Doesn’t State have the same tools that would permit it to ID, extract, and categorize emails just as quickly? Why does it take State months to do what it took the FBI a relatively few days to do? Something here doesn’t pass the smell test, expect for those people who are nasally challenged.

You really don’t understand how classified material works. Simple words or phrases in conjunction with each other become classified. Some you can’t even read out loud. It’s complicated and while you can get retroactive clearance for something you stumble across they try to avoid that in the first place. I’ve worked at a place with over a hundred thousand employees and four could handle certain documents.

The penalty for failing to secure those? Up to twenty years in prison. No intent needed on your part. There are people in prison now who will be in prison when the next president term limits out.

39 degrees is just a tad too warm for beer. 35 is too cold. I am going to spend the next 4 years finding the exact temperature for beer. I will need to factor in outside temp and humidity, elevation, atmospheric pressure and visibility.

Visibility is important because if it is already foggy out, you don’t need to increase the foggy inside. I might have to set up a network of people reporting, testing and re-testing.

If this is successful, and Hillary gets another 4 years then we can move on to Jack Daniels next.

We can combine our research. While you should never be around guns or ammo and any form of alcohol or even cold medication, we can work out recommended tables.

Example… on a day that is 92.3 degrees with a humidity level of 73% you move 9,000 rounds of .223 ammo to your basement which is 84 degrees with a humidity level of 79%. How many 36 degree beers do you need to stay hydrated.

And as a follow up, if you do this and then watch President Hillary give a State Of The Union speech, how many gallons of 100 proof tequila do you need to keep from killing yourself or stabbing your eyes with an ice pick?

We had a President who perjured himself while in office and nobody seemed to care. It seems to me that if somebody is willing to perjure himself over something as meaningless as sex, then where does he draw the line on important issues?

Now we have that ex-President’s wife running for office and, instead of perjury over sex, she has perjured herself over the handling of national security assets. The FBI has said that she has been extremely careless and has lied about her carelessness with national security.

The FBI goes on to say that they simply don’t care; they are not going to charge her. The DOJ says that FBI is right about this, nobody cares about national security or that we have criminals in office.

Kind of clever don’t you think? There is no criminality if we don’t charge anybody, so our politicians are as pure as snow.

BTW, where did all this nepotism come from anyway? Adams, Roosevelts, Bushes, Clintons and next up, the Obamas. Will we feel incomplete until we’ve fought our own ‘War of the Roses’?

Comey is an intelligent man never once had he said there wasn’t sufficient evidence to charge her nor that she should not be charged, he has always said that he is not recommending charges. Everyone wants to get angry with him for this but let’s be honest with our current administration and AG why would he? What good would it do?

It’s not up to him if charges are filed that is up to the federal prosecutor, who works for Lynch. Also the case would be assigned to a Clinton supporter anyway.

It would end his career and make him a target for the rest of his life. When I say target I mean Political, Professional, and Personal.

Situations like this are why the AG should be elected not appointed.

The final reason why Comey isn’t stupid enough to recommend charges can be summed up in this simple video.

If Comey wanted to maintain his reputation as a straight shooter he should have done what FBI directors normally have done. Forward the results of the investigation without recommendation and without a press statement. Let the DoJ make the prosecutorial decision. But he didn’t. So everything that followed is all his own fault.

Well, McConnell and Ryan just held a presser and stated that, in light of the toxic atmosphere this investigation has created, the Senate would be confirming Obama’s SCOTUS nominee immediately in order to restore a sense of decorum and civility in these trying times.

I was talking to a couple today who said they didn’t think it was a big deal that Hillary sent classified information over a private server. I pointed out that if I had broken the law to the degree she has over the years, I’d be in Federal prison. The woman said… oh, I don’t think so. You’re just blowing it all out of proportion.

That’s what we’re dealing with.

Only a very small percentage of the population holds or has ever held a security clearance. It’s not really surprising that so very many people (including all of the media) have no idea of the seriousness of Clinton’s actions. It was drilled into me from day one: If you do this, or if you fail to do this, you WILL be prosecuted. It doesn’t matter if it was a careless error, there is zero room for mistakes. Intent has absolutely nothing to do with the end result. Intent may put you in prison longer but even a careless mistake can imperil your future. Most Americans have never and will never face that level of accountability.

If you have a chance to talk with that couple again, pose this to them:

“I have a private email server. It is not in any way secure from any form of semi-sophisticated hacking. So pretty much the entire underworld on the Internet could penetrate it if they desired to do so.
Would you let me store your social security number on that server? Your DOB? Home address? Banking and credit card info? Medical records?”

Obviously, nobody would consent to this. Then ask them, “If your personal information is so precious that you wouldn’t permit its exposure like that, how can justify or rationalize the same type of exposure of classified information by one of the highest government officials in the land?”

You are right. There is also the issue of all the nasty other things these people are involved in, too many to mention. Hopefully they all come to light, in the mainstream media. We get all driven up over Kim Kardashian’s butt, and we let these psychopaths do these things and screw us over. We even pay them for the privilege.

Keyword searches only tell you about keywords. They don’t tell you what the emails are actually about, nor do they catch incriminating emails not containing said words. To properly evaluate them you have to read them, which cannot be done in the time allotted. If they just did keyword searches (and of course we don’t know what they searched for) this was an obviously fake investigation.

This is an email chain from clinton to Podesta. The email chain begins with a discussion involving Syria, Iraq and Turkey. Definately sounds like classified information. What makes this damning is the header was changed in the last 2 entries to make the emails look like just a personal message. Especially damaging is the date in which the header was changed. It was during the same time clinton’s lawyers were “sorting” personal emails from government related emails. Easy to now just delete a confidential government document as the header and the last 2 entries look personal. This is a perfect example of how a header search would not expose what was really in an email. I would not be surprised if there are many emails that fit this pattern and were missed by a cursory header search..